CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Nazareth House - Northampton
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. They found appropriate protective equipment, testing, cleaning, risk assessments, safe admissions and visiting arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed as a full quality area, although inspectors noted that the registered manager completed regular infection prevention and control audits.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control during a targeted COVID-19 inspection.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 3 March 2022. This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, including the effect of COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
They found staff had training and checks on using protective equipment. The home was clean, well laid out and followed its infection control policy. Testing, risk assessments, safe admissions and visiting arrangements were in place.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall CQC quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Staff PPE training
Staff had training and their ability to put on and remove protective equipment was checked and reviewed.
“Staff had their competencies assessed and reviewed regarding donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, without odours, and with regular cleaning of frequently touched areas.
“The service was cleaned to a high standard, cleaning of all areas including high touch areas had been completed regularly throughout the day.” from the report
Infection controls
The home was following its infection control policy and had regular audits and testing arrangements.
“The provider's infection control policy was being followed and the service adhered to additional best practice guidance.” from the report
Family visiting
People could receive visitors in a dedicated room or their bedrooms, with no limits on how often they could visit.
“There were no restrictions on how often people could receive visitors.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What staffing pressures are you experiencing now, and how are you making sure they do not affect people living here?
- 02How do you currently manage COVID-19 or other infection outbreaks?
- 03How are new residents supported to self-isolate when needed?
- 04How can family visits take place now, and are there any booking or visitor restrictions?
- 05How often are infection prevention and control checks carried out, and what happens when a problem is found?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other care areas or an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 May 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and good management, with a few records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 and 13 November 2020. It was prompted partly by concerns about safeguarding and infection control. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was clean and staff used protective equipment properly. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, well-managed risks and suitable training. People said they felt safe, and staff understood how to report abuse.
The home was judged Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used for the overall rating.
Infection control
The home was clean and odour free. Staff had infection control training, and protective equipment was available and used properly.
“People were protected from the spread of infection.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were completed, and call bells were answered promptly.
“Records and our observations evidenced that there were enough staff available to answer call bells promptly to attend to people's needs.” from the report
Person-centred care
Staff knew people well. Care plans included important personal information, and people were supported to make choices about their daily lives.
“Care was person centred. Staff knew people well, care plans included life history, family relationships, religion and culture.” from the report
Learning and oversight
Managers used audits, incident reviews and complaints to identify improvements. Staff were also supported to take further learning opportunities.
“The management team worked in partnership to monitor the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Cleaning records
needs fixingFrequently touched areas were cleaned, but this cleaning was not included on the schedule and was not consistently recorded. A schedule was put in place immediately after the inspection.
“Frequently touched area cleaning was not included on the schedule and was not consistently recorded.” from the report
Emergency information
needs fixingOne personal emergency evacuation plan did not reflect a recent decline in mobility, and information about another person was missing from the emergency grab file. The area manager agreed to review the plans.
“one person's PEEP had not been updated to reflect a recent decline in mobility” from the report
Monitoring specialist equipment
minorStaff knew how to check specialist mattresses, but there was no record to show that these checks were being monitored.
“there was no method of recording this for monitoring.” from the report
- 01How do you now record and check cleaning of frequently touched areas?
- 02Have all personal emergency evacuation plans been reviewed after changes in people's mobility?
- 03How do you record checks on specialist mattresses and other safety equipment?
- 04How do you make sure there are enough housekeeping staff on every shift, including afternoons?
- 05Which ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the other key questions were not inspected and their previous ratings were used. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 December 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Nazareth House - Northampton
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- May 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Nazareth House - Northampton →
- December 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Nazareth House - Northampton →
- January 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 April 2012.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of West Northamptonshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,280 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.